june 2007, logical reasoning 1, question 23
summary
the content delves into solving a sufficient assumption question on the lsat, focusing on a philosophical argument about moral actions and their impact on aggregate well-being.
- identifying the conclusion is crucial for solving sufficient assumption questions, especially when dealing with complex philosophical statements.
- the argument posits that actions expected to neither harm nor benefit people (neutral actions) are morally right, based on premises about actions that increase or decrease well-being being morally right or wrong, respectively.
- formal logic and contrapositive reasoning are essential tools for dissecting the argument and identifying the correct answer.
- answer choice c, stating that any action not morally wrong is morally right, completes the logical chain needed to prove the conclusion.
- other answer choices are dismissed either because they restate known information or fail to directly support the conclusion.
chapters
00:00
understanding the question
00:26
dissecting the argument
02:16
applying formal logic
03:21
evaluating answer choices
